{"id":11647,"date":"2011-08-25T09:28:01","date_gmt":"2011-08-25T08:28:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/?p=11647"},"modified":"2011-08-25T09:35:49","modified_gmt":"2011-08-25T08:35:49","slug":"cameron-and-osborne-did-the-tax-deal-to-support-tax-evasion-theres-no-other-explanation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2011\/08\/25\/cameron-and-osborne-did-the-tax-deal-to-support-tax-evasion-theres-no-other-explanation\/","title":{"rendered":"Cameron and Osborne did the Swiss tax deal to support tax evasion – there’s no other explanation"},"content":{"rendered":"

The UK - Swiss tax deal does not meet with my approval, as some will have noticed. The deal is outlined here<\/a>.\u00a0My objections are littered through the blogs preceding this one.<\/p>\n

But let's stand back for a moment and consider why the UK have done this deal - uniquely (because it seems unlikely that the supposedly similar German one will get parliamentary approval and so will not happen).<\/span><\/p>\n

It's important to say this deal was not needed. The revised\u00a0European Union Savings Tax Directive is on the table. Twenty five EU states support it and it has looked very likely recently that compromise with the other two was\u00a0possible\u00a0and that Switzerland could have been pulled on \u00a0board. So deal that would have ensured there was\u00a0automatic information exchange on all interest income and gains arising throughout Europe,\u00a0Switzerland, Liechtenstein and the UK's tax havens was on its way, covering not only individuals but companies and trusts as well and with names and addresses being supplied.<\/p>\n

That deal would have ensured we'd have got all the\u00a0information\u00a0we needed to demand all the tax due by those who have been criminally evading their tax bills by hiding funds in Swiss banks that have been deliberately and knowingly helping them to do so.<\/p>\n

And I think the UK- Swiss tax deal has been deliberately\u00a0engineered\u00a0to scupper that EU wide deal\u00a0because\u00a0it\u00a0would have applied to Jersey, Guernsey, the\u00a0Isle of Man, Cayman and all other British tax havens that comprise the branch offices of the City of London tax haven. And it would also have extended information exchange to\u00a0companies\u00a0and trusts - which would have shattered the tax evasion industries in these British tax havens.<\/p>\n

So what have Cameron and Osborne done? They've as far as I can see absolutely deliberately signed the deal with\u00a0Switzerland\u00a0in an effort to destroy that EU deal. Even the FT says this morning<\/a>:<\/p>\n

We\u2019re not experts in this field but we also wonder whether these bilateral deals mark a setback for international efforts, led by the OECD and EU, to force the Swiss into further transparency.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe UK\u2019s willingness to legitimise secret accounts on a \u2018no-names\u2019 basis is controversial because it treats users of secretive havens more leniently than other taxpayers,\u201d notes the FT.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So how should we really interpret this deal?<\/p>\n

What's very obvious it is deliberate move by London. And it's also very obviously deliberately designed to help tax evaders by making sure that the\u00a0Crown Dependencies and others can remain in that sordid business.<\/p>\n

So we have to conclude that this is not a move\u00a0against\u00a0tax evaders - all of whom will be laughing themselves silly about how easy it is to get around this Swiss deal.<\/p>\n

In that case let's not put too fine a point on this: this is the Treasury and our political leaders going out of their way to support criminality by making sure that a measure - the European Union Savings Tax Directive -\u00a0that would blow tax evasion in British\u00a0dependencies\u00a0apart\u00a0cannot now be implemented. And all, no doubt, at the behest of the City of London.<\/p>\n

There's no\u00a0other\u00a0reasonable interpretation for what they have done.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The UK – Swiss tax deal does not meet with my approval, as some will have noticed. The deal is outlined here.\u00a0My objections are littered
 Read the full article…<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[22,4,6,7,63,55,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11647","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cayman","category-guernsey","category-isle-of-man","category-jersey","category-switzerland","category-tax-evasion","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11647","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11647"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11647\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11647"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11647"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11647"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}